Vote Delay

Why have Democrats fought hard to keep Tom Delay on the ballot in Texas? Answer: To disenfranchise voters.

Now we know, "…let every vote count," actually means only when it benefits Democrats.

For those who are unaware, Democrats sued to keep Tom Delay on the ballot in Texas after he resigned his office and announced he would not run for re-election. It could be that they just want Delay to stay in congress, but I doubt it. It's more likely that they wish to confuse and disenfranchise voters by keeping Delay on the ballot even though he isn't running.

Democrats had hoped to wrest the conservative district from him. But DeLay seemed to thwart those designs in April, when he announced that he would resign from Congress and move his official residence to Alexandria from his suburban Houston district, making him ineligible to run for reelection.

Texas Democrats sued to keep him on the ballot, maintaining that state election laws say victors in a party primary must appear on the general election ballot unless they die or live outside the district on Election Day. They pointed out that DeLay still owns a Houston area home, where his wife, Christine, lives and where he still spends time.  ~washington post

But all is not lost. Rather than just let the conservative voters of his district be disenfranchised by anti-democracy Democrats, Delay has indicated that he will in fact fight for the voters in his district.

A source close to the ex-Congressman tells TIME that DeLay is planning an aggressive campaign to retake the House seat he quit in June if an appeals court lets stand a ruling by a federal judge last week that his name must stay on November's ballot--even though he has moved to Virginia. "If it isn't overturned, Katy bar the door!" says a G.O.P. official. "Guess he'll have to fire up the engines on the campaign and let 'er rip." DeLay, awaiting trial for money laundering, never intended to fade away. He plans to give paid speeches and has signed a deal to have his bio penned by best-selling author Stephen Mansfield.  ~time magazine

I suspect that the trumped up political charges, half of which have already been thrown out, made by the partisan Democrat DA, Ronnie Earle, will also fail to stop Tom Delay. As you will no doubt recall Democrats engineered a series of bogus indictments in order to smear our beloved Republican leader in Congress. All in the name of democracy of course.

That committee made contributions to Texas legislative candidates, constituting what Earle now charges is "money laundering."

The only problem is that similar transactions are conducted by both parties in many states, including Texas. In fact, on October 31, 2002, the Texas Democratic Party sent the Democratic National Committee (DNC) $75,000, and on the same day, the DNC sent the Texas Democratic Party $75,000. On July 19, 2001, the Texas Democratic Party sent the DNC $50,000 and, again on the same day, the DNC sent the Texas Democratic Party $60,000. On June 8, 2001, the Texas Democratic Party sent the DNC $50,000. That very same day, the DNC sent the Texas Democratic Party $60,000.

Ronnie Earle charges Delay with money laundering in an issue of $190,000 supposedly used to corrupt Texas politics. Yet Ronny Earle uses this very same indictment of DeLay to raise $102,000 for the same kind of political action committee. Outright using his partisan indictment for democratic fundraising!

"This case is not just about Tom DeLay. If it isn't this Tom DeLay, it'll be another one, just like one bully replaces the one before."

The dinner and the speech raised $102,000 for Texas Values in Action, a political action committee created to help fund Democratic Party efforts to recapture control of the state legislature. ~washington times

Ahh, Democracy in action.

Posted by Eric Simonson at July 10, 2006 1:44 PM
Comment #166330

What better way to get a Dem into office than to force the most corrupt GOPer neofascist in recent history to run under his true colors, as per the law? Let’s not forget DeLays indictment, after he managed to keep his posts by changing house rules that required him to step down if “under investigation” to “indicted”.

Now simonson wants us to believe that it’s Desperate times for the Democrats. Thanks for the good joke.
BTW: What happened to innocent until proven guilty? Eh? eric, or does that only apply to the corrupt Repugs in DC, not the other parties?

Posted by: Dave1 at July 10, 2006 1:57 PM
Comment #166333

I think this sucks, but the Dems hands are tied. We have to play hardball. When Republicans gerrymander districts and jam phonelines, the opposing party has no choice but to fight with everything they have. If you don’t like it, please ask your party to stop the madness.

Posted by: Max at July 10, 2006 2:04 PM
Comment #166336

dave1 and max

It is so sad that you can’t come up with something worth debating. Of course Ronnie Earle could give you some real dead tidbits, it you wanted to continue on the loser course. Show me the facts that Tom DeLay did anything wrong. Not spin like cotton candy. I want the hard nosed facts. That should open the door for you to really reach.

Posted by: tomh at July 10, 2006 2:12 PM
Comment #166338


You must not be understanding the money laundering charges. Delay’s money laundering involved a third party, TRMPAC, not just the state and national parties. That is where the violation of law took place.

The fact that anyone is still standing be Delay just shows how corrupt the party is, right to its core. Hell, Newt gingrich is even planning a run in ‘08. How quickly you forget.

Posted by: David S at July 10, 2006 2:18 PM
Comment #166340

Bravo, Eric, Delay’s charges amount to almost nothing. This is yet another example of a liberal (prosecutor, not judge this time) playing politics and not listening to the law.

And it appears that the Dems’ plan is going to backfire…they won’t win Delay’s Reoublican district, and their tirades will provide more fodder for the GOP in the mid-terms.

A double whammy!

Posted by: Alex Fitzsimmons at July 10, 2006 2:18 PM
Comment #166345

The Defeaticrats have only one thing to run on this year and that is global warming. Considering all the hot air coming out of Washington these days, Gore missed another beat. It should be global boiling. In New Mexico they have an annual hot air balloon festival. I think it would be great for all those hot air experts to show up for some votes.

Posted by: tomh at July 10, 2006 2:34 PM
Comment #166348

Why do you call it “disenfranchisement” when the Democrats are just trying to enforce the law? Are the Democrats doing the disenfranchising or is it the law? Why didn’t the GOP speak up about this law before? How come it’s only now, when they would like to have the opportunity to drop Delay from the ballot mid-stream that the “horribleness” of this law finally becomes worth talking about?

Seems to me that the GOP just wants to ignore the law when it suits their convenience. The Dems probably don’t care too much one way or the other about law, either, but the fact is that the law is the law, and it should be honored until the legislature changes it. Isn’t that the way the law works?

Posted by: Homer at July 10, 2006 2:41 PM
Comment #166349

I’ll be glad to cover bets that think Tom Delay will win this. He’ll have to serve his term from jail, though. He broke the one law that Texas actually has regarding campaign finance. Tom is so far past the line that he could not even abide one law. Texas has no other laws regarding campaign finance.

Now the rest of the Nation will see what kind of crook Tom Delay is. Yeah!!!!

Posted by: gergle at July 10, 2006 2:44 PM
Comment #166352
This is yet another example of a liberal (prosecutor, not judge this time) playing politics and not listening to the law. And it appears that the Dems’ plan is going to backfire…they won’t win Delay’s Reoublican district… Posted by: Alex Fitzsimmons at July 10, 2006 02:18 PM
Is this an example of a chickhawk counting the chicken before it’s hatched?

Also; We know how partisan Earle is, just look at his record:

Other politicians investigated by Earle
Texas Supreme Court Justice Don Yarbrough (Democrat - 1978) - Texas Supreme Court Justice Don Yarbrough was convicted of lying to a grand jury and forgery. He gave up his seat and was sentenced to five years in prison.
Texas State Rep. Mike Martin (Republican- 1982) - Martin, who represented Longview, pled guilty to perjury and did not run for re-election.
State Treasurer Warren Harding (Democrat- 1982) - Harding pled no contest to official misconduct and did not run for re-election.
Texas Attorney General Jim Mattox (Democrat- 1985) - Mattox, a political rival of Earle’s,[16] was acquitted of bribery and went on to win re-election.
Texas House Speaker Gib Lewis (Democrat- 1992) - Lewis pled no contest to charges of failing to disclose a business investment after a plea bargain. He did not run for re-election and was fined $2000.
Texas State Rep. Betty Denton (Democrat- 1995) - Denton was convicted of listing false loans and contributions on campaign finance reports and was sentenced to six months probation and fined $2000.
Texas State Rep. Lane Denton (Democrat- 1995) - After funneling money from the Texas Department of Public Safety Officers Association, Denton was convicted of theft and misapplication of fiduciary property. He was sentenced to 60 days work release, six years probation, and fined $6000.
Texas State Board of Education (SBOE) Members David Bradley (Republican), Bob Offutt (Republican), and Joe Bernal (Democrat) - Earle initiated a criminal investigation against three SBOE members in 2002. Earle accused the board members, who are elected from districts in Texas, of violating the state’s “Open Meetings” law when the three met for lunch at a restaurant in Austin, Texas on the day of an SBOE meeting. The law requires a public meeting when elected bodies assemble in a quorum of three or more persons to conduct business. The SBOE members responded that they were simply eating lunch. Earle turned the investigation over to Travis County Attorney Ken Oden, who in turn indicted the members on misdemeanor counts. [17]
Travis County District Attorney Ronnie Earle (Democrat- 1982) - After Earle’s campaign filed required campaign finance reports a mere one day late, rather than recusing himself and seeking to have a special prosecutor appointed, Earle actually brought charges against himself. He managed to secure a conviction and paid a $212 fine.[18]

Posted by: Dave1 at July 10, 2006 2:45 PM
Comment #166355

——‘The Defeaticrats have only one thing to run on this year and that is global warming.’


This is why I like it when the conservatives speak up. The ignorance really shows.

First, I’m glad you agree with the global warming issues.
Second, what happen to all the other issues; War on Terror, Iraq occupation, Ignoring constitutional rights, Osama Bin Laden, are just a few of the top issues. I think there’s more than one issue that is being debated lately.

Please show up in Albuquerque in October, they’ll need you.

Posted by: mem beth at July 10, 2006 2:54 PM
Comment #166356

“When Republicans gerrymander districts and jam phonelines, the opposing party has no choice but to fight with everything they have. If you don’t like it, please ask your party to stop the madness.”

Yes they do have a choice and they “choose” to disenfranchise voters b/c of their political bias. Nice choice, huh?! Madness runs deep on both sides; sorry “your” side didn’t prove that they were the better side.

Posted by: rahdigly at July 10, 2006 3:04 PM
Comment #166361

If you actually read the link, you will see that Eric’s source did, in fact, spell out how Earle concocted his “money laundering” charge.

If you go back far enough, you can trace any money to a corporation. Hell, I would not be surprised if one of the dollar bills in my pocket was used to purchase an illegal drug at some point before it was in my possession.

I hope Ronnie does not decide to charge me with laundering money for some Columbian kingpin. That would suck….

Posted by: Rich at July 10, 2006 3:29 PM
Comment #166368


You mean spectator? They’re more full of shit than Rush after his Viagra turned out to be Pepto in diguise.


Is “disenfranchise” the new talking point from the Repubs? I didn’t know they could rememeber so many syllabyls in one word…

Posted by: Dave1 at July 10, 2006 3:58 PM
Comment #166373


I’m not defending anyone. I think if someone wants to pull out of a race they should be able to. I ALSO believe that districts should be drawn so that each party has a fighting chance.

I guess the difference here is the I am willing to criticize my own party when it comes to stuff like this, whereas I’ve heard nothing like that from Republicans in previous threads. This is suppossed to be a democracy, and games like this make everyone lose out.

That said, I hardly equate the two. The gerrymandering will disenfranchise voters for generations. This is a one time deal. If you don’t like it and have some scruples go ahead and call your own party on it. As far as corruption and disenfranchising voters is concerned your party wins by far.

Posted by: Max at July 10, 2006 4:48 PM
Comment #166374

“Money laundering” means to hide the true origins of money, to make its origins look clean when they really are dirty. It is a crime that requires intent. (By the way, Rich, the “intent” requirement is the reason you are safe. Now you can relax.)

As Delay knows, corporations cannot contribute to Texas political parties. Thus, a rouse was concocted whereby corporations would give the money to the national party who would immediately refund it to local Texas politicos. The intent of the artifice was to hide the true origins of the money and to coverup the violation of Texas criminal law.

The grand jury thought that Delay conspired in this plan. It seems hard to believe that he didn’t (given his direct involvement with and oversight over the folks whose names are all over the paper trail), but, given the presumption of innocence, it is plausible that a jury will conclude that a reasonable doubt exists concerning Delay’s involvement.

That being said, the rhetoric flung about by the Spectator and Rich and tomh is basically crap. Earle didn’t have to concoct anything to get Delay indicted.

Posted by: Homer at July 10, 2006 4:49 PM
Comment #166376

Hey Homer,

The Dems didn’t care so much for the LAW when Torricelli resigned in New Jersey. There the NJ state supremes declared that the Dems could replace Torricelli on the ballot even though the LAW clearly said they couldn’t.

I’m not an expert on New Jersy or Texas election law. However, the rules at the start of the game should be the rules at the end of the game. I object to changing rules during a game and so should you.

Posted by: Martian at July 10, 2006 5:01 PM
Comment #166377

“Earle didn’t have to concoct anything to get Delay indicted”

How many grand jury’s did he go through until he found one willing to indict based on his proof?

I’ve heard different numbers and not being up to date on this case, would appreciate any info.

Posted by: kctim at July 10, 2006 5:04 PM
Comment #166387


As usual you are changing the subject. You don’t talk about DeLay but about Earle and Democrats.

Do you think that DeLay is an honest guy who never did anything wrong? Do you believe he and Abramoff were just having fun? Do you believe DeLay did not violate the Texas campaign financing law? Do you believe that DeLay did not make K Street a subsidiary of the Republican Party?

DeLay is crooked and when he mounts his campaign everybody will see just how crooked he is.

Posted by: Paul Siegel at July 10, 2006 6:03 PM
Comment #166388

If I’m not mistaken, the Judge in this case is a Republican. Of course, the Right-Wing Pundits will assume it’s a partisan deal here, rather than consider that somethings that go against their party do so for politically neutral causes.

The trick here is that the Republican Primary is over and done with, and the voters made their choice. While there’s nothing stopping DeLay from bowing out of the race, election law prevents them from simply shoehorning in an unelected substitute after the fact.

If the GOP really had wanted to substitute somebody for dear old Tom, the time to do it was before the primaries. The Republicans have tried to have it both ways, defiantly supporting their poster boy to a primary victory, and then attempting a bait and switch on Texas voters when it became clear he couldn’t win.

There’s just one problem: so far, the judges don’t think it’s legal. Maybe they’ll convince somebody, but for now it’s just not cricket.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at July 10, 2006 6:05 PM
Comment #166396

Here we are talking about Delay being a crook. We seem to forget Clinton and his Oval Office escapades and lieing about it. Ted Kennedy and that thing some years back on Cape Cod. John Kennedy and Bobby, Marilyn Monroe. The rep from Louisanna and his money problem I think his name is Jackson. The rep in Calif. and that girl that turned up dead. That’s just to name a few. There are probably Rep. to that need to be on the list. But before we start pointing fingers, lets look in our own backyard first.

Posted by: Rich at July 10, 2006 6:38 PM
Comment #166405

So which is it? Either Delay is a martyr for the Right wing cause, wrongly accused of invented crimes, or the mere appearance of his name on the ballott will disenfranchise voters? Can’t really be both, can it?

Posted by: David S at July 10, 2006 7:02 PM
Comment #166410

After the latest gerrymandering in texas was upheld by the Supreme Court (read the majority opinion for a great lesson in how consitutional law has become a joke in the legal world), I don’t think there is any shred or even illusion of fair political practices there. Dems stand absolutely no chance of winning more seats thanks to careful redistricting (republicans are now re-drawing the lines every few years…even despite there being no new census data to point to). Now tell me again how keeping Delay on the ticket will “disenfranchise” voters? The system is designed to make a republican vote worth more than a democratic vote anyway, so I think “disenfranchisement” is less a future concern than a harsh reality of the present. Par for the course if you will.

So forcing people to see the name of the person they elected and gave extraordinary power and money to on the ballet … this is nothing more than a mirror being held to the faces of all those back-stepping idiots who voted blindly for him because he had an (R) next to his name. You people know who you are, and you are the real cause of partisan politics. They wouldn’t treat us like we’re stupid if it weren’t for the fact that morons will vote down straight party lines more often than not. And those morons have now become the majority. Now look at congress…see what you get when you don’t force your party to realistically consider who they put on that ballet? Votes straight down party lines, scandels, a budget more full of pork than a Nathan’s hot dog, and civil “servants” spending 95% of their days collecting money from people they do not represent. At least not officially.

Now we’ve got Eric saying that the Dems aren’t even allowed to try to make money off one of the potentially biggest scandels in the opposing party’s history. They ARE trying to embarrass their enemy. They ARE daring voters to re-elect someone indicted and under investigation for fraud. And it is all legal.

They will still come in well under the amount the rep’s will raise (and have already raised). So why act as if it is some conspiracy to deface the state of politics. As if contrived in some smokey back room among wearers of monocles. This is just modern politics. Make money, make money, and make money. Worry about the rest later.

So what ever hapenned to campaign finance reform anyway? I have a feeling it’ll get brought up in October, when all the money has been collected…then killed the following year by those who need to collect again.

Posted by: Kevin23 at July 10, 2006 7:24 PM
Comment #166432

Hey Delay was all for staying on the ballot, until the court decided to go ahead with his trial,and he decides not to try for reelection then ALL OF A SUDDEN, he no longer lives in TEX ASS, but now Va.
Well no matter where he lives, is soon hopefully will be at the bar hilton, but probably not, Bush will pardon him.

Posted by: KT at July 10, 2006 8:19 PM
Comment #166436

The definition of disenfranchise is to deprive of voting rights. But nowhere in this ridiculous post was there any evidence of anyone being deprived of their right to vote. Given the author of the post, the lack of anything except invective shouldn’t be surprising.

Ludicrous attacks like this are yet another good reason why support for the Republicans is in the low 30% range and still dropping like a stone.

Posted by: ElliottBay at July 10, 2006 8:34 PM
Comment #166439

And support for the Dems is down to 22%. Great election coming up folks.

Posted by: tomh at July 10, 2006 8:49 PM
Comment #166455

tomh must be referring to a Fox Poll. The others have Democrats favored above Republicans. Though, I agree, it’s not a world of difference as both parties will do anything above or below the law to keep power, the people and the Constitution be damned.

Posted by: David R. Remer at July 10, 2006 9:54 PM
Comment #166462

I believe the point of this post is how the dems have beat their chests for the past few years about how every vote needs to count and how certain voters have been disenfranchised. So now we have a situation where the dems are basically forcing Delay to run in this race with the intent of having the dem candidate run against someone who is under indictment. The obvious objective here is to to try to keep Republican voters at home so that a democrat, might win this seat where most of the voters are Republicans. If the democrat wins this district will have a representative who doesn’t represent the views of the majority of voters. If Delay wins you step up the prosecution to try to keep him from being effective at his job. And what if Tom Delay is as bad as you say he is? Wouldn’t you then want to let him bow out for the good of the country? Fat chance of that. In either case you screw the voters of this district with no apologies. Delay tries to step down but you take legal action to make him run. Maybe its legal but forgive me if I laugh I hear dems complain about disenfranchising voters.

Posted by: Carnak at July 10, 2006 11:18 PM
Comment #166465

“The definition of disenfranchise is to deprive of voting rights. But nowhere in this ridiculous post was there any evidence of anyone being deprived of their right to vote.”

Indeed. Let us (once again) laugh in the general direction of the over-the-top ridiculousness of such an argument — made in defense of a Republican whose many corrupt actions are so obviously indefensible.

Posted by: Adrienne at July 10, 2006 11:59 PM
Comment #166467

In 2000, Mel Carnahan defeated John Ashcroft to win a seat in the US Senate.

Mel Carnahan won, even though he was dead.

Once people have expressed their will through a vote, whether in a primary or a general election, the voters cannot be disenfranchised by party leadership.

Candidates may be corrupt, dead, or worse. They may have been caught in bed with a dead girl or a live boy. It does not matter. Once candidates win a primary, they must stand in the general election.

A federal court has already stated this in the DeLay case. Again, once people have voted for a candidate in a primary, the political party cannot overrule the vote in favor of a candidate perceived to be more desirable. The appeal is widely expected to be withheld.

“The obvious objective here is to to try to keep Republican voters at home…”

What are you talking about? Republicans voted for DeLay in the primary, and DeLay won. End of discussion.

Thanks for quoting the Washington Times. Tell me, if you could write for the Times, and work directly for its owner, Reverend Sun Myung Moon, would you do it? You quote his paper. Would you work for him in a more direct fashion?

Posted by: phx8 at July 11, 2006 12:13 AM
Comment #166473


Hey, I’m not saying the guy doesn’t prosecute when need be, but his liberal agenda surfaces when he incessantly pursues and lambastes a prominent GOPer when the law has almost completely exonerated the man in question.

Posted by: Alex Fitzsimmons at July 11, 2006 12:39 AM
Comment #166475


Since you asked what I am talking about I will clarify it. Yes the Republican voters voted in the primary and Delay won. The democratic goal for the general election is that Republicans will stay home. Nothing illegal about the tactic just hypocritical in light of their comments over the past few years.
If Delay does run and wins I would hope you wouldn’t pile on the hypocracy by complaining about him being in congress since the dems forced him to run.

Posted by: Carnak at July 11, 2006 12:59 AM
Comment #166476

So much garbage, so little time… Fix8, what is your problem with the barely heard of Reverend Moon, what is the guy an alien or something? Or do we have a rascist problem (libs love minorities or say they do, until the minority bites the hand that feeds them and become conservative. Then we see true colors!!! And libs call the repubs racist! Don’t thinks so, see the liberal attempts to destroy Lt. Gov Michael Steel in Ohio, or calling Condoleeza Rice “Aunt Jememiah” in the editorial cartoons of the NY Jihad Times.

So some religious rightwing crackpot (and boy, we do have them! Just like you guys on the left have your religous nutjob/icons like Gore and Peloisi) -owns a newspaper, so what? The Seattle Fishwrapper and the Seatle PI (personally incompetant) are owned, run and admired by libs…and I (nasty, meanspirited, closed minded conservative homophobe that I am,lol!) still read them, knowing that if I stay with a strict diet of right wing radio I will only get about half the informative argument I would otherwise recieve. Maybe you should accept the idea that you have competition in the ideas/news media market. Neither the liberal or conservative voices are going to go away anytime soon: the market economy will decide who will “live” and who will “die” in a purely economic sense of the word.

And that applies to the political world as well, where it seems that conservatism remains on the rise. Which is good, up to a point. We still need liberals to remind us what self-destructive nuttiness looks like and we still need them to remind ourselves that not all good ideas come from conservative thinking.
Peace Out, America

Posted by: HardHatHarry at July 11, 2006 1:24 AM
Comment #166477

Are you sure it is Democrats responsible for this. Maybe it was illegal immigrants,or gays,or flag burners,or the New York Times. It could not posibly be the fault of that corrupt thug you guys put in the leadership.Or just maybe if he was not so arrogant he would not have run in the primary. I hope he rats out the lot of them on his way down.

Posted by: BillS at July 11, 2006 1:30 AM
Comment #166479

“On March 23, 2004, at a ceremony in the Dirksen Senate Office Building, an ornate crown was placed on Moon’s head, and in a long speech Moon claimed he was “sent to Earth … to save the world’s six billion people… . Emperors, kings and presidents … have declared to all Heaven and Earth that Reverend Sun Myung Moon is none other than humanity’s Savior, Messiah, Returning Lord and True Parent.”

If Gore has himself crowned in an elaborate coronation ceremony as Messiah, I assure you I will view his self-proclaimed godhood with considerable consternation.

Moon pours tens of millions of his own personal fortune into the Washington Times. No respectable reporters work for it. Yet conservatives blithely accept the point of view of the leader of this cult.

If you find yourself nodding in agreement with the political views of a self-proclaimed Messiah with a personal fortune of over $900,000,000, well, maybe it is time to rethink your views.

Posted by: phx8 at July 11, 2006 1:46 AM
Comment #166481


Earle did NOT WANT to bring the indictment initially because he knew it would be a hot-potato. HE HAD TO, after the reality of the very public admissions of many of the contributors to the illegal fund became public. Those of you on the right who imagine it to be a political witch hunt are deluding yourselves!

I was in Austin when DeLay rolled in to town from D.C. last summer for the indictment proceedings. He first spent an immense amount of money FROM THE VERY FUND THAT IS THE SOURCE OF THE PROBLEM on T.V. ads to convince prospective jurors in Travis county that the whole thing was a baseless political witch hunt (while being VERY CAREFUL I might add, to avoid any actual denials of the already known facts), then he turns around and moves for a change of venue based on the corruption of the jury pool in Travis county. I traveled up to Tulsa OK, to see family I have there and was stunned to see the Tulsa World News carrying a story about the indictment, purporting to be news, that was nothing more than a long string of quotes from DeLay’s defense council. Then I met Tulsans who told me that the Tulsa World News was one of those “liberally biased” newspapers.

I don’t know if the dishonesty I see on the right is a product of the right being intentionally deceptive or just plain willfully not seeing the forest for the trees, but there is no denying it is real.

DeLay won the primary. There is not another primary to make another candidate available on the ticket. The determination that DeLay remain on the ballot is a right one. The denial that there is wrongdoing on the part of Delay is willfull delusion.

And then following all this with an exhortation to “vote DeLay” is the height of dishonor and moral ( and political ) irresponsibility.

Posted by: RGF at July 11, 2006 1:55 AM
Comment #166485

That’s pretty interesting and pretty damned nutty if you ask me, you’ll pardon me fix8 if I say that I never heard anything about that. Also to be honest, I don’t put much stock in Wiki-pedia. But wealthy religious wack-jobs have a right to an opinion and to promote their opinion just as much as anyone, or do think well known God-hater George Soros should be forced to keep his trap shut, his funds away from his willing allies and so forth? He funds several newpapers, dozens of blog site and hundreds of activist campaign groups, and he is just as elaboratly disturbed as the good Rev, and without the justification that his organization may well be doing some great good works despite their largly nutty sounding leader. In addition to providing jobs for disreputatable reporters (ie, conservatives) he and his organization also stand guilty of feeding the hungry, organing homeless mens’ shelters, providing care for homeless mothers and their children and so forth. (Yes, of course they do it to prosletyze! Duh! Thats how religions grow!)
Terrible man, that Reverend Moony.
Maybe we should have him gun whipped and then hung to death by his elderly testicals.
Bwah hah hah!
Oh…and delay is innocent. Moses told me so.

Posted by: HardHatHarry at July 11, 2006 2:16 AM
Comment #166494


Since you’re so interested in the LAW, why don’t you explain to some of your Democrat friends that according to the LAW as interpretted by the Supreme Court, which I do believe the LAW says is the highest court in the land, BUSH WON!

Posted by: 1LT B at July 11, 2006 2:47 AM
Comment #166501

Delay is ready to cash in. Screw the party, Screw the US, Screw Texas. He was ready to become a lobbiest. Of course he has to stay out of jail. He could still lobby behind the scenes, and just lie and pretend he doesn’t lobby, kinda like he pretended he didn’t take money from corporations for steering their legislation through the Texas legislature and US House. Wink, Wink, Nod, Nod.

Posted by: gergle at July 11, 2006 6:25 AM
Comment #166503

Hard Hat Harry,

My friend’s parents are members of Moon’s church, they were an aranged marriage, and they believe in some insane stuff. You should read the Moonie handbook on sex, its disturbing. Moon has also served prison terms for tax evasion and is generally considered completely nuts. He owns the Washington Times, and the paper conveniently alters copy dealing with him, because it is there soley to reflect Moon’s world view, that he is the savior of humanity.

Theyre not quite as bad as La’Rouche’s followers, but there are certainly more of them.

Posted by: iandanger at July 11, 2006 7:07 AM
Comment #166508


Can you explain to me how DeLay’s situation is any different to Torricelli’s in New Jersey. I’m not all that familiar with election law in Jersey or Texas, but it seems to me that the law in each state should have forced each man to continue his run once he surpassed a certain point in time.

I’m not sure its possible to support Torricelli’s departure from his race unless you support DeLay’s ability to depart from the Texas race, and vice versa. At least not possible unless one is partisanly hypocritical.

I’d like to know your stance.

Posted by: joebagodonuts at July 11, 2006 7:41 AM
Comment #166512

If someone wants to retire, they should be allowed to retire, this dirty tricks stuff is irritating.

Posted by: iandanger at July 11, 2006 8:49 AM
Comment #166515

Great. No wonder Republicans have such a problem with truth. They read rags like the WT and believe it’s prints truth. Pravda-like papers would be the media outlet of choice in their Nirvana. All spin, all the time. Goebbels would envy them.

Tom Delay was one of the prime movers in Abramhoff’s world. It’s what he was selling. Buy your legislative influence here!!!! His staff became the big dog’s in Abramhoff’s lobby interests. A major local builder deftly limited liability for Home Builders in Texas thanks to Delay and Rick Perry. Buy a lemon? Tough titties!!! Let’s not foget Delay’s fun little excursions to Scotland at the expense of Indian tribes. I’m glad those Casino’s aren’t buying any influence in Texas and Lousiana politics. They just like to send White Congressmen to Play a Scottish game at St. Andrews. It’s all about the Indians in the end.

Even the Republicans began to urge him to step down. Even his district began to turn negative on Delay. Think stink is so obvious to us here near Sugarland, that some of us had to move upwind to keep our lunches down. The refineries smell better.

Posted by: gergle at July 11, 2006 9:03 AM
Comment #166518

“Regarding the grand juries involved with Delay’s indictment: I’m sure you know the facts … er, at least, FoxNews’ version of them”

First off, I do not really watch any TV and most of the radio I listen to makes Republicans look like liberals.

Now, I thank you for giving me a little up to date on the Delay thing. I really have not been keeping up with it.
Whether Delay is a Rep or Dem makes no difference, the results would be the same.
The politicians are for themselves and really are not that different from each other. But as long as they can keep the people fighting amongst themselves and ignoring them, they will stay in power.
Liberal or Conservative doesn’t matter. Neither represents the people.

Posted by: kctim at July 11, 2006 9:19 AM
Comment #166532

Democrats are f**king ignorant. They wanted Delay out, now they are making him stay. He’s going to win this election and go back to bringing down the hammer on them.

Posted by: RANDY at July 11, 2006 11:39 AM
Comment #166535

“Delay is ready to cash in. Screw the party, Screw the US, Screw Texas. He was ready to become a lobbiest. Of course he has to stay out of jail. He could still lobby behind the scenes, and just lie and pretend he doesn’t lobby, kinda like he pretended he didn’t take money from corporations for steering their legislation through the Texas legislature and US House. Wink, Wink, Nod, Nod.”

find me one politician on EITHER side that hasn’t done this gergle, I dare you to try

Posted by: RANDY at July 11, 2006 11:47 AM
Comment #166539


Let’s see, Hairy Reed from somewhere west of Washington, DC and Rusty Poorsilver from cheesehead country, and San Fran Nan from somewhere, nobody knows and, well you should be getting the pix. They took Abraham money and did not return it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Corruption? When I have beef stew I take all the carrots out because I don’t like them. So when you accuse one person of wrongdoing, don’t sort them out according to political party. Be fair.

Posted by: tomh at July 11, 2006 12:03 PM
Comment #166543

Most (if not all) incumbent politicians are irresponsible, bought-and-paid-for, and couldn’t care less about the welfare of the nation.

Show you care, and start votin’ these crooks out of their cu$hy coveted seats of abused power.

Otherwise, it will be you, the average voter, that suffers the most. Not the polticians with their golden parachutes and big-money puppeteers.

Ignore the petty partisan warfare, and the pointless debate about who is more corrupt … that is irresponsible incumbent politicians’ favorite detractor. That is how they distract voters from important issues.

Prioritize, and start with the root problem: corrupt, irresponsible government, and voters that keep re-electing them.

We’ve all been there and done that, and it ain’t workin’ !

Stop Repeat Offenders.
Don’t Re-Elect Them !

Posted by: d.a.n at July 11, 2006 12:15 PM
Comment #166550

I live in Tom DeLay’s district.He ran a very hard primary campaign,there was actually an excellent Republican candidate,Tom Campbell,who was characterized by DeLay as a Liberal.He lost.
It is my general perception that DeLay ran in the Republican primary just to get the money for his defense.If Tom really cared about anyone but himself,he would have pulled out before the primary.Instead he ran,knowing that while he would win in a Republican primary-he would probably lose in the general election-in no small part because his newly gerrymandered district now contains many more,shall we say,less heartily Republican, areas.Now,well,we can’t wait to vote against him.Hoist by his own petard.
Couldn’t happen to a nicer guy.
Oh,and the last Fox poll I could find had Democrats faovored over Republicans in a “Who would you vote for Congress” by 46% to 33 %.Don’t know where you got the 22% number.

Posted by: Terry......... at July 11, 2006 12:38 PM
Comment #166559

I gotta thank you republicans out there who are continually bringign up Delay. Keeping Delay in the media is helping the left immeasurably. Especially since he is a simptom of the very disease that is plagueing the republican party. Keep it up, Eric Simonson, JBOD and others…We love ya for it!

November, here we come.

Posted by: RGF at July 11, 2006 1:06 PM
Comment #166563
First off, I do not really watch any TV and most of the radio I listen to makes Republicans look like liberals. Posted by: kctim at July 11, 2006 09:19 AM
kc, Where do you place Bush? Posted by: Dave1 at July 11, 2006 1:36 PM
Comment #166566

I place Bush in the same category as clinton, kerry and dean: modern US politician.
They all believe in a social welfare state that does not respect states rights or our Constitution.
It is foolish to believe there is difference simply because one is Democrat/Republican or not.

Posted by: kctim at July 11, 2006 1:50 PM
Comment #166567

Like tomh said lets be fair Jefferson Dem from Louisiana got caught with his fingers in the cookie jar to. If someone were to investigate the house and senate we would probably find 400 plus congressmen and 100 senators guilty of something even if it’s just an unpaid parking ticket. A man I know always told us when you start pointing fingers there is always 3 pointing right back at you.

Posted by: RAK at July 11, 2006 1:59 PM
Comment #166599

Well someone brought up the polls taken by Fox, you should have said Fox national mouth of the republican party. I belive what comes from that as much as the republican party. When you poll all republican of course it is going to slant the way you want.

Posted by: KT at July 11, 2006 4:27 PM
Comment #166637


I don’t get it. When Kerry was accused of being a waffler, it was Bush who had waffled, not Kerry. …and yet, how many bought it?

Now we have the Delay situation: It was NOT a poltical accusation! Earle brought the indictment because the contributors to the illegal fund ADMITTED TO IT PUBLICLY!!!!

A D M I T T E D T O I T P U B L I C L Y .


Sure, if you investigate every member of congress, house and senate, you will undoubtedly find more corruption…


…and yet in the interest of *some* kind morality, you on the right claim it to be politically motivated…without even looking into it very deeply. Why do I say you have NOT looked into it deeply? Because I believe that most, if not all of the people who blog here have at the very least, enough inteligence to recognize truth when they see it and this is a case where all the elements of the crime are public and readily available. There is no room left for doubt or bias. This is real, whether you like it or not.

Posted by: RGF at July 11, 2006 6:32 PM
Comment #166644


What you said is not accurate, they did not take money from Delay or Abramoff, they took money from indian tribes, they did not know they were involved with Abraamoff and his ilk.

that being said i hate the large donations, they put representatives in a conflict of interests.

Posted by: iandanger at July 11, 2006 7:03 PM
Comment #166646
Sure, if you investigate every member of congress, house and senate, you will undoubtedly find more corruption.

Then we’d have no one to run the government!

Run it into the ground (that is).

Most (if not all) are crooked because they look the other way (if for no other reason).
Most (if not all) vote for pork-barrel (while our troops risk life and limb).
Most (if not all) resist reforms (such as campaign finance reform).
Most (if not all) are FOR SALE.
Most (if not all) have stacked to cards to secure their incumbency.

Yet, we keep re-electing them.

So who is more stupid ?

Posted by: d.a.n at July 11, 2006 7:07 PM
Comment #166650


You certainly have a point. I agree with you that the longer an incumbent politician stays in office the more likely it is that they will engage in corrupt activity. The temptations come fast and come often at them…it is only a matter of time before they sucumb to some influence peddling that they cannot resist. THERE ARE EXCEPTIONS. There are stronger characters…just not as many as we would all like.

However, the point I was making is that it is simplistic to look the other way and disregard or poo-poo the corruption we ALREADY KNOW that Delay is guilty of, just because there *might*, or is *probably*, other corruption in congress! …regardless of the party of the person engaging in it.

I believe your idea of voting out incumbents has merit, d.a.n. It is just that your idea is not what I was adressing with my post.

Posted by: RGF at July 11, 2006 7:30 PM
Comment #166708

The left had a column that addressed this issue. Speech does not equal money except in the corrupt world of politics and Madison Ave.

TomH, please gets some facts before you throw accusations. As I understand it, Abramhoff worked the Republican side of the aisle. As much as Reps want it to be about the Dems, it isn’t. That is not to say they don’t take bribes or sell votes. I just don’t get why you on the right defend even the crooks of your party. The Republicans have made it a high art form in this legislature.

Posted by: gergle at July 12, 2006 12:39 AM
Comment #166709

By the way Eric, if you are looking for disenfranchisement how about looking into Ohio, Florida and Texas Republican party efforts.

Tom Delay orchestrated his campaign, not the Dems. Tom broke the law, not them Dems. A judge decided that Tom vacated the office, the Republicans can’t void their own primary. It was all about political clout with Tom. Good Choice for a candidate.

Posted by: gergle at July 12, 2006 12:45 AM
Comment #166735

The Republicans just can’t seem to be able to keep from tripping over the law, can they? If it weren’t for these damn laws, the GOP could have the kind of authoritarian regime necessary to shape people up or get rid of them. It’s the Democrats fault for heralding the Constitution and its laws as some kind of great and strong backbone of America. If Democrats had just trashed the Constitution and the laws like they know they wanted to, Republicans wouldn’t be tripping up over them every time they make an authoritarian decision. Damn Democrats. They have ruined this country’s last great hope for an orderly future under Republican Authority.

Posted by: David R. Remer at July 12, 2006 5:33 AM
Comment #166817

In 2002 Senator Torricelli, Democrat, New Jersey facing saging poll numbers, “resigned” from his campaign less than sixty days before the general election. State law did not allow for him to be replaced on the ballet, nonetheless, the Democratic appointed State Supreme Court allowed it. The New Jersey consitution doesn’t allow deficit spending either, but when Governor McGreevey did so, they allowed that too. Don’t talk to me about the Democrats and the law.

Posted by: Mike at July 12, 2006 1:01 PM
Comment #166864


New Jersey might as well for a foreign nation to me. I couldn’t care less about local politics in New Jersey and it hardly says anything about Democrats…although it does apply to New Jersey.

Delay is getting NATIONAL support now and he is crooked as all hell. Besides, you are telling about very local thing in New Jersey while the discussion here is about Delay…and Delay ties in to a much broader pattern in a way that this never-got-out-of-New-Jersey story exactly DOESN’T.

Posted by: RGF at July 12, 2006 4:43 PM
Comment #166867

Besides, MIKE,

Nothing you have mentioned about New Jersey is even a crime. The Governor in NJ must have an unusual amount of power if he can, soley on his own discretion, make and pass state budgets that violate anti-deficit spending ammendments in the state constitution. Oh, and I’m not buying the ‘Democratically’ appointed attempt to imply bias on the NJ Supreme ct. Unless you can talk about the reasons and considerations behind the decision, I gotta call BS on that shot. You can hardly refute the notion that the Supreme Ct. of the Nation is a republican appointed one, and yet, they are busily overturning decision after decision with respect to this administrations actions and priorities. LAW IS LAW and politics is politics.

The crimes committed by Delay and those who contributed to his fund is known and public now. No room left to pretend it isn’t real.

Posted by: RGF at July 12, 2006 4:52 PM
Comment #166872

First: Different State, with different laws and different courts

Second: You might want to ask us what we’d prefer. There are plenty of us who like this no better than you…

Third: …and a Republican Judge in Texas who believe replacing weak candidates after deadlines is a bad precedent to set!


Fourth: I hate the “you’re doing it too” defense. You should too. First, in concedes there’s something to the other side’s point. Otherwise, why would it be so effective? You’re saying that we should hold off because our people are doing the same thing. You’re arguing DeLay should get a substitute because Torricelli did. Many conservatives questioned that decision, as well as Liberals. Now you have this Republican Judge thinking things out legally instead of just going by his political gut.

Ultimately, the fact that DeLay can’t use it, means that future Democrats might have a harder time doing so. I think in deciding whether or not to support a party’s attempts to gain power, we should ask ourselves what kind of precedent we want to set for what the rival party can do to us. That to me is sensible.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at July 12, 2006 4:58 PM
Comment #166918

I think the republicans have something to learn from the democrats. That’s how to hide their crimes better.

Posted by: RAK at July 12, 2006 8:51 PM
Comment #166929

Stephan Daugherty, well said! RAK, like you can teach a Repug anything. Sheesh.

Posted by: ray at July 12, 2006 9:29 PM
Comment #167487

Parties and the petty partisan warfare is the best thing politicians ever invented, because it is so damned effective at pitting Americans against each other so that a majority can never exist to vote irresponsible, corrupt, bought-and-paid-for, greedy incumbent politicians out of their cu$hy, coveted seats of abused power.

And the proof of it is obvious. It matters little how corrupt and irresponsible they are, because voters keep re-electing them, regardless.

Incumbent politicians make the most of it, and the level of brazenness is quite interesting.

Congress persons on the take don’t seem to care whether they are caught red-handed, or not.

And why should they worry?
For example, consider Rep. William Jefferson. He was video-taped accepting a $100K bribe, put it in the trunk of his car, took it home and hid $90K of it in his refrigerator, and claims he has done nothing wrong. The FBI has not even charged him. No wonder incumbent politicians are so crooked and arrogant.

Consider Dan Rostenkowski and the other 139 felons pardoned by Clinton. Dan pled guilty, but he still got a pardon.

So, who says political crime doesn’t pay ?

Yet, we keep re-electing them.

No wonder incumbent politicians are so corrupt ?

They are above the law. Even if ever convicted, they can get a pardon.

Posted by: d.a.n at July 14, 2006 10:53 AM
Post a comment